Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Look at the history of mankind. All the wars fought on behalf of religion and skin color.
Well the Germans and Russians in the 1940's fought the most violent, barbaric and inhumane war in human history and both groups are composed entirely of white people.
People who look similar and share common culture tend to have it out for each other in a far more inhumane manner then groups who are radically different.
Sino-Japanese war
Rwandan Civil War
etc...
I don't see skin color as a catalyst for most conflicts, its not supported by historical evidence.
Some races/ethnicities are more violent and less intelligent and more ethnocentric/tribal independent of their environment than others due to 10s of thousands to 100s of thousands of years of natural selection and divergent evolution
then you said:
E Asians and Western Europeans are the most intelligent and have less violent societies. Why do you keep asking me what psychometric research and statistics, not to mention cultural achievement clearly show? Much of Africa and Pre-Columbian America and other third world areas have always been violent and deficient in progress.
My point to you is that through most of history the people of Western Europe were barbaric, violent and uncivilized. So claiming that natural selection and divergent evolution somehow made 21st century Western Europeans less violent then everyone else in a 300 year span is utter nonsense.
I know that's your claim but the rest of the world was often more barbaric, violent and uncivilized than Europe at the same time prior to the 14th century.
I know that's your claim but the rest of the world was often more barbaric, violent and uncivilized than Europe at the same time prior to the 14th century.
That statement is simply too broad and ignorant of world history. There were many non western regions and countries that were less barbaric then parts of Europe. Much of Africa, the Middle East, and Asia were quite peaceful.
The Mongols kept a very safe and stable country and many of their successors did the same same after the collapse. From the 13th to the 14th century was called the Pax Mongolica and encompassed a huge amount of Asia, from Korea to Poland, to India and Arabia were all subjugated to the Mongols and it was a very peaceful time period.
Europe had many wars, but it remained fairly stable until the Protestant reformation in 1500. But in all honesty, the Catholics were fairly brutal for a few hundred years.
White murder rate in the U.S is three times higher than Western Europe. Even the most violent city in France, immigrant dominated Marseilles has the same murder rate as white people in America. To pretend like if you just took out the blacks America wouldn’t be abnormally violent, just isn’t true. Canada is about the only comparable country to us that is first world in terms of violence.
That's not accurate. White murder rate is only 3x the rate of one Western European country...Austria. It is about 1.5x the rate of the average Western European nations (and lower than both Belgium and France).
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenFresno
Well Western Europe and the Far East was were the two worst wars in human history took place. So I am not buying the whole genetic "less violent" thing.
The Middle East was were civilization started and was the epicenter of civilization for thousands of years. During most of this time Europe was a barbaric wasteland. Was this because Western Europeans were less intelligent and more prone to violence then people in the Middle East?
Nobody really knows exactly how violent and sadistic early Middle Eastern peoples might have been so claiming that the region was superior with regards to the prevalence of civilized behaviors is without much basis. Obviously the rest of what we call "civilization" such as widespread agriculture, highly organized governments, and major constructions...yes, the ME had a major head start on. However, the brutality of the most advanced civilization of the region - that of Egypt, is clearly at a level that is shocking to any modern person. With a strict caste system, oppressive monarchy, religious zealotry and superstition, cruel slavery, and human sacrifice, let's just say it would at best be "nightmarish". Exotic and interesting from the comfort of our modern perspective, and fascinating as we marvel at their artifacts and relics behind museum glass - but it would have been an unimaginably difficult life for the average person, probably with much personal violence as well as deprivation, poverty, illness, and despair. To paraphrase Hobbes, we would best describe life in the times as "nasty, brutish, and short". Demonstrably, these conditions were the norm for high AND low civilizations of the ancient world and likely vary only by degree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoreau424
Anti-multiculturalism is the cause of "so much" violence. All that goes with it - racism, classism, prejudice, etc. - works against us and leads to violence.
Simply put, when we recognize and remember what our country was founded on, open to all, rich in culture and diversity, we flourish and are more at peace. When we forget that and/or work against that, the violence rises.
That's a lot of liberal wishful thinking and nonsense. Crime rates have nothing to with whether you think the population is sufficiently cowed by Cultural Marxists and their delusional aspirations to genocide against whites. And BTW the nation was NOT founded for everyone or to be "rich in culture and diversity". It was founded by English people for themselves. Who exactly do you think was speaking when they wrote that the entire point of this new nation was the singular goal of securing the Blessings of Liberty, "For our Selves and our Posterity"? It wasn't some Bengali or a Watusi tribesman. The proposition of ethnic diversity as a founding principle of this nation is a ridiculous notion promoted by revisionists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kajo13
The 1970-80 murder rate was comparable to the high murder rate from 1915 to approximately 1930. Then plummeted. Rose again in the 70's to plummet again to historically low levels in the 90's through the 2000's.
If third worlders are to blame, why did the rate not exceed previous predominately white population rates and why did it plummet again? They didn't all vanish in the 90's.
The 1950s and 1960s had the lowest violent crime rates of the century, and it was not until drug epidemics created widescale urban gang violence that they really spiked. Leaded gasoline also played a likely part in the violent crime increases that were evident beginning in the later half of the 60s. The removal of leaded gas in 1974, as heavy metal toxicity has a long-tail effect in onset and cessation, is likely another large factor in the decrease observed that affected all racial groups.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare
You telling me you would live in a London that had a homicide rate between 36 and 52 murders per 100,000 and call it civilized? I have lived in a similar environment in Nigeria and know that isn’t a great experience when you try to go to the airport and on your way the police and cult leaders have a violent shootout in the middle of the street like what happened to my Dad just 2 years ago.
Also the white murder rate in America is between 2.4 and 2.7 any given year. This is the same as the most violent cities in Western Europe like Marseille or Glasgow. America as a whole is much more violent than their first world counterparts, only a few northern states are close to Western Europe and even then their still a bit higher.
That isn't true. The white murder rate is between 1 and 2 and that is calculated with Hispanics included. If you calculated the "white alone" rate it would be even lower. The white murder rate as it is even with Hispanics in is comparable to many European countries including some Western European ones such as Belgium.
Marseille is more violent than the rest of the surrounding region of Europe because its full of violent people that are not European. 40% of the population are Muslim Arabs, some other large and possibly overlapping percentage are African refugees with little education or skill...its this low-IQ, low human capital population that creates the level of violence that stands in sharp contrast to actual French people (not people born to immigrants to France) and other people of European descent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658
Yes, there was a lot of violence in the past when people were less enlightened.
But, today in 2018 the most egalitarian and safe places to live are the Western Nations. (Europe, Canada, USA, Australia, New Zealand). There is a reason while all immigrants of the 3rd world want to go to the West.
Was there violence in the past, sure, but we are less barbaric in 2018.
Stop the bigotry dude!
Yep. And instead of staying in their own lands and creating the American Dream for themselves, they prefer to come here and steal ours.
That statement is simply too broad and ignorant of world history. There were many non western regions and countries that were less barbaric then parts of Europe. Much of Africa, the Middle East, and Asia were quite peaceful.
The Mongols kept a very safe and stable country and many of their successors did the same same after the collapse. From the 13th to the 14th century was called the Pax Mongolica and encompassed a huge amount of Asia, from Korea to Poland, to India and Arabia were all subjugated to the Mongols and it was a very peaceful time period.
Europe had many wars, but it remained fairly stable until the Protestant reformation in 1500. But in all honesty, the Catholics were fairly brutal for a few hundred years.
Sure and it was great if you don't overlook that the Mongol Empire's conquests killed 5% of the global population and enabled the spread of plague that killed another 10% in Eurasia, including most of their famed "Mongol Horde". Roughly 300 million people died as a direct result of their bloody violent conquests to establish their 100 years of peace. Probably the peace only existed because all capable of resisting had already been wiped out and the survivors demoralized and broken.
That statement is simply too broad and ignorant of world history. There were many non western regions and countries that were less barbaric then parts of Europe. Much of Africa, the Middle East, and Asia were quite peaceful.
The Mongols kept a very safe and stable country and many of their successors did the same same after the collapse. From the 13th to the 14th century was called the Pax Mongolica and encompassed a huge amount of Asia, from Korea to Poland, to India and Arabia were all subjugated to the Mongols and it was a very peaceful time period.
Europe had many wars, but it remained fairly stable until the Protestant reformation in 1500. But in all honesty, the Catholics were fairly brutal for a few hundred years.
Someone else brought up all of world history and even threw in the empire wars in Europe in the 20th century as if that was dispositive of the matter at hand. Funny when it's readily admitted that societal violence in Europe was very low by around the time of the empire wars.
What I'm saying is most of Europe even during the middle ages were Europeans peacefully living in various kingdoms and plenty of advancement. This idea that Europeans culturally were violent, barbaric and relatively not advancing compared to just about anywhere else supposedly superior in the world until some arbitrary years sometime after 1300 and magically transformed is not true. .
Yes, there was a lot of violence in the past when people were less enlightened.
But, today in 2018 the most egalitarian and safe places to live are the Western Nations. (Europe, Canada, USA, Australia, New Zealand). There is a reason why all immigrants of the 3rd world want to go to the West.
Was there violence in the past, sure, but we are less barbaric in 2018.
Stop the bigotry dude!
A Europe free from the type of rapacious barbarism that they’ve historically been known for is a relatively recent phenomenon. Little more than half a century. Don’t act like it’s the historical norm. It ain’t.
A Europe free from the type of rapacious barbarism that they’ve historically been known for is a relatively recent phenomenon. Little more than half a century. Don’t act like it’s the historical norm. It ain’t.
There’s not one lick of bigotry in what I said.
Sure there isn't . There's not really one lick of truth in what you said either.
I know that's your claim but the rest of the world was often more barbaric, violent and uncivilized than Europe at the same time prior to the 14th century.
No, multiculturalism isn’t the problem. There are tons and tons of multicultural neighborhoods, towns, cities, and countries with very low violent crime rates. Singapore is the the most multicultural city in the world and has the lowest crime rate in the world. Here in N America one just has to look at Toronto or Vancouver, how about dozens of various cities in California, Washington, and NY. While DC has some dangerous area, there are some very diverse neighborhoods that are very safe.
Wealth and poverty are much bigger influences then culture in relation to crime and violence. I can think of more then a few white trash mobile home parks that are nearly all white with large amounts of crime and violence. The same goes with every other race and ethnic group. Plenty of homogeneous places with lots of violence and crime. There are much larger factors at play then culture. Pretty much every culture promotes peace, safety, and quality of life, there might be a few exceptions, but I can’t think of any.
Both Canada and Australia are more multicultural than the US and have significantly less violence.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. There's not really one lick of truth in what you said either.
